He also discussed the personal letter Pope Francis sent him upon accepting his resignation Oct. 12, as well as his 18 years as a bishop in Pittsburgh, the Pennsylvania grand jury report, his 12 years as archbishop of Washington D.C., the McCarrick case, the accusations leveled against him and the pope by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò, and Cardinal Marc Ouellet's response.

"I was very moved that [the pope's letter] it highlights what is so important to me, namely that the shepherd's first responsibility is to his flock, is to the people entrusted to his pastoral care and that the unity of the flock is so important," Cardinal Wuerl told America when asked for his reaction to the letter from Pope Francis.

"I felt that my ability to be able to serve that unity would have required concentrating on a defense of myself and of my actions and that would, I believe, have taken us in the wrong direction rather than trying to do the healing and unity as quickly as possible. That's why I asked the Holy Father to accept my resignation so that a new and fresh leadership did not have to deal with these other issues."

In his letter, Pope Francis appeared to believe that while the cardinal committed "some mistakes," he did not engage in "cover up" or fail "to deal with problems."

When asked if that was how he saw it, too, the cardinal responded: "Yes, and I said that. I made errors of judgment when we were dealing with all those cases before the Dallas Charter.

"Some of those errors in judgment were based on professional psychological evaluations, some of the errors were based on moving too slowly as we tried to find some verification of the allegations. Those were all judgmental errors, and I certainly regret them."

And, he added, "I think it is also worth noting that all those priests who were faced with allegations in my time there, if there was any substantiation for them they were removed from any ministry that would put them in contact with young people."

He said, "I think what we can say is that a careful reading of the [Pennsylvania grand jury] report and the Diocese of Pittsburgh's response, which the Pennsylvania Supreme Court allowed to be attached to the grand jury report, shows that I acted in a very responsible way to remove predator priests."

When asked if he wished he had done anything differently during his 18 years as a bishop in Pittsburgh, the cardinal said: "It's a hard question to answer because in those early years of my ministry, that was before the change in canon law, before the Essential Norms, there were a lot of things that I did that went in the direction of trying to get some proof of allegations.

"I think where we are today is a different place. When an allegation is made today without any corroborating testimony or proof, the person is still put on leave.

"I think had that practice and that approach to canon law been operative when I began ministry in Pittsburgh, things would have been very different. Then we were required to have some modicum of proof before moving out the person."

In his letter of August 25, Archbishop Viganò attacked Pope Francis for allegedly covering up Archbishop McCarrick's abuse and accused him of lifting the sanctions that Benedict XVI had imposed on McCarrick.

He also accused Cardinal Wuerl of not enforcing the secret sanctions.

Last Sunday, Cardinal Marc Ouellet, the prefect of the Congregation for Bishops, of which Cardinal Wuerl is also a member, responded in an open letter to Archbishop Viganò's attack against the pope, addressed the question of sanctions and stated, "I conclude that the accusation is a political plot devoid of real foundation that could incriminate the pope and has profoundly wounded the communion of the church."

Asked if he agrees with the Canadian cardinal when he calls Archbishop Viganò's attack "a political plot [set up]," Cardinal Wuerl responded: "In my read of that testimony, particularly the part that touches me, it is not faithful to the facts.

"There can be reasons for that, and I think Cardinal Ouellet is touching on what may be the primary one. In his testimony, Archbishop Viganò clearly says that there were secret sanctions in some form.

"But he also says himself that he never communicated them to me.

"Yet this should have been his duty.

"I find it difficult to accept his version that he holds me responsible for implementing something he never passed on or his gratuitous insult that I must be a liar when I say that I never received these secret sanctions.

"Certainly I would never have guessed that there were sanctions against Cardinal McCarrick from all the times I encountered him at receptions and events hosted by Archbishop Viganò at the Apostolic Nunciature.

"The gap between what he says and what he did and his easy calumny call into question for me the real intent and purpose of his letter." Continue reading

• Image: America Magazine

Though not the largest or wealthiest diocese, its archbishop is often the most politically well-connected cleric in the United States.

All that changed when its former archbishop, Theodore McCarrick, was revealed to be a serial sex abuser.

Then, accusations of complicity began to pile up against his successor, Cardinal Donald Wuerl.

On September 12, his spokesman said he would travel to Rome and ask Pope Francis to accept his resignation.

There is much speculation about who will succeed him, but the consensus is that Archbishop of Washington isn't the cushy job it once seemed.

Indeed, being a bishop suddenly seems less desirable.

The fallout from the McCarrick is threatening to bring whole dioceses crashing down.

This scandal first erupted on June 20, when the Archdiocese of New York announced that "credible and substantiated" claims had been levelled against McCarrick dating back to 1961 while he was a priest of the archdiocese.

The archdiocese issued a press release, calling it "the first such report of a violation of the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People ever made against [McCarrick] of which the archdiocese was aware".

The wording of this statement raised eyebrows: the archdiocese did not say whether allegations had been made by men old enough to legally consent.

New York's powerful archbishop, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, made matters worse by saying Wuerl shouldn't resign.

Dolan called him a "good friend" and "tremendous leader", and suggested he was being judged too harshly by the laity.

The laity, in turn, were outraged.

Some of Dolan's conservative critics accused him of being beholden to the so-called "lavender mafia", also citing his decision to allow gay pride groups to march in New York's 2015 St Patrick's Day Parade.

The Archdiocese of Chicago, too, is becoming ungovernable.

In his "testimony", Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò claims its leader, Cardinal Blase Cupich, was appointed at McCarrick's and Wuerl's behest.

Viganò also accused Cupich of being too close to the LGBT rights movement. Evidently, some of the faithful in Chicago have similar concerns about the city's Catholic establishment: last week, parishioners at Resurrection parish burned a rainbow banner that the late Cardinal Joseph Bernardin hung behind the altar before the parish's 1991 inaugural Mass.

As the Vatican and its allies struggle to regain control of these major dioceses, the question of who succeeds Wuerl is not the most pressing concern.

We should ask instead which bishops will replace Wuerl as a figurehead in US Catholicism.

Two candidates are Archbishops José Gómez of Los Angeles and Charles Chaput of Philadelphia.

Both were appointed by Pope Benedict in 2011.

They preside over two of the largest dioceses in the country: the first and sixth, respectively.

Gómez is also the vice president of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) and is expected to assume the helm when its current president, Cardinal Daniel DiNardo, steps down next year.

Had Benedict's papacy run its natural course, both men would almost certainly have been appointed to the College of Cardinals by the end of 2014.

Instead, Pope Francis has pointedly refused to elevate either of them.

Many believe Gómez and Chaput are too conservative for the pontiff's tastes.

Indeed, Viganò claims Francis told him the American bishops "must not be ideologised, they must not be right-wing like the Archbishop of Philadelphia" during their first meeting after Francis's election.

Instead, the Holy Father promoted theologically progressive bishops like Cupich and Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, first to major dioceses and then to the College of Cardinals - effectively creating a "Francis Party" within the USCCB.

Today, membership of the Francis Party is less a badge of honour than a bullseye.

Having been snubbed by Francis has, in fact, boosted Gómez's and Chaput's reputations in some circles. Continue reading

• Image: CNS

Vigano alleges Pope Francis knew former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick had "corrupted generations of seminarians and priests" but nonetheless decided to lift sanctions.

Sanctions that included "a life of prayer and penance" which had been imposed on the retired D.C. archbishop by Pope Benedict XVI in either 2009 or 2010.

Archbishop Viganò, the papal representative to the United States from 2011 until he was recalled to Rome by Pope Francis in 2016, did not provide documents proving that sanctions were imposed by Benedict.

Nor did he provide evidence that Francis knew about the sanctions or that he lifted them.

During the years that then-Cardinal McCarrick was allegedly sanctioned by Rome, he kept up a public profile that included preaching at high-profile Masses, giving talks and accepting awards.

He testified in front of a Senate subcommittee and appeared in the media.

The cardinal also kept up a famously robust travel schedule, in part because he served on the board of Catholic Relief Services and chaired the board of the charitable arm of the international development nonprofit.

A spokeswoman for C.R.S. told America that then-Cardinal McCarrick traveled on "a couple of dozen trips during that time, including in Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America" between 2009 and the end of Pope Benedict's papacy in 2013, adding that C.R.S. was "unaware" of any sanctions.

Archbishop Viganò alleges that after several specific attempts to convince the Vatican that then-Cardinal McCarrick should be sanctioned because of allegations of sexual misconduct with priests and seminarians, prohibitions were handed down in 2009 or 2010.

Those sanctions, he said, required the cardinal to move out of a seminary where he was living and forbade him to celebrate Mass in public, participating in public meetings, giving lectures or traveling.

He was to dedicate "himself to a life of prayer in penance."

Pope Francis removed then-Cardinal McCarrick from ministry in June following substantiated allegations that he had sexually abused a minor decades ago.

Sharon Euart, R.S.M., a canon lawyer and the executive director of the Resource Center for Religious Institutes, said that while she could not comment on the specifics regarding the onetime archbishop of Washington, D.C., a priest or bishop who is punished with sanctions removing him from ministry would be notified in writing.

Sister Euart said that whoever has jurisdiction over the offender would normally be notified of the penalty so that the offender could be monitored.

In the case of then-Cardinal McCarrick, it is not clear who may have been asked to monitor him.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who succeeded Archbishop McCarrick in Washington, has said he was not made aware of any sanctions, a statement challenged by Archbishop Viganò.

"There is certainly expectation that they would abide by the regulations of their particular situation," Sister Euart said, adding that she would find it "unusual" for such penalties to remain secret. Continue reading

• Image: America Magazine

You can find it at The Wuerl Record. *

This is the sort of action we usually see being taken by a Chairman of the Board, or a CEO, or a politician, and that's very telling; it exposes a mindset that is geared toward management and administration, with a less-than-optimal pastoral sensibility on display.

It's all too much of the world.

I'm being kind, okay?

Here's the truth: Too many of our bishops are men who have not heard someone talk straight to them in decades.

They're beyond insulated — they never hear anyone say "no" to them, or give them a hard time.

You need a little friction in life to keep you grounded — without it you just become slick, and start to spin.

All day yesterday, as Catholics read the devastating and sickening Grand Jury report out of Pennsylvania, Catholics on social media repeatedly asked: "What can we do? How do we begin?

What are the first steps to restoring trust and rebuilding our Church?"

Good questions which we need to answer because it actually is our Church — the People of God's.

Management or ministry?

One noteworthy line in The Wuerl Record may answer "How to begin?"

While I served as Bishop of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, and as our understanding of child sexual abuse increased, the Diocese worked to strengthen our response and repeatedly amended the Diocese's safeguards and policies. The Diocese worked to meet or exceed the requirements of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the reporting requirements of Pennsylvania law.

Emphasis mine, because it's important; this is the language of the boardroom, where Key Performance Indicators (KPI) are cited to help assess failures or successes, and to produce subsequent values.

Within context, they are all about the measure of management, not ministry.

And that's where The Wuerl Record has unwittingly shown where we might look to "begin to effect change" — and it is a change that isn't even contingent upon a Papal action; the bishops can voluntarily take this up tomorrow if they are sincere about finding ways to restore trust within the American church.

Priests or executives?

It's quite simple: Currently, most of our bishops are more executives than priests, so let's get them out of the boardrooms, entirely.

In one part of the grievous Grand Jury Report, Cardinal Wuerl is reported to have have presided over the funeral of an abusive priest — one member of a horrific and perverse group who gave gold crosses to altar boys meant to signal that the boys "were optimal targets for further victimization".

At the Mass Wuerl "stated, among other things, that ‘a priest is a priest. Once he is ordained, he is a priest forever.'"

Well, if so, then let our bishops and cardinals act like priests, not elite executives.

It's very clear that too many bishops and cardinals have shown themselves to be untrustworthy overseers; they need to learn how to be priests again.

And there is no better way to do that than to toss them out of the cushy offices, greatly reduce the number of personal assistants, end the entourage, discourage the gold cuff links and the bespoke shirts and the limos.

Send them forth with a pair of good shoes and a working phone, into the mission territory of their parishes.

Let each bishop acquire a diocesan administrative team of trustworthy, capable professional lay people who have no disordered attachment to ideas of protectionism or clericalism.

That removes the prelate from management concerns and permits him to become reacquainted with the real and practical ministry for which he was ordained and should be at the very core of his priesthood.

• Make the course of their day all about ministry and service, bishops reconnecting to their priesthood not through careerist networks but by spending their time actually working and praying with the people of their diocese they're supposed to be serving.
• Get them into the outreach offices, helping families with strained economies — learning about what their daily lives, joys, and struggles involve.
• Get them into the soup kitchens, serving hungry people, and maybe even sitting with them and hearing their stories, learning their names.
• Let them show up at parish RCIA classes and participate in adult formation; let them bless houses, and meet with the bereavement groups and the local Knights, and the Biker's Club, and the Venturing crew. Let them take a seat at a choir practice, once in a while.
• Let them become pastors who talk to their sheep not at them — who are not hidden in a posh house with layers of filtering office staff keeping the flock at a preferred distance, only connecting them with the bishop when matters absolutely demand it.

Starting is not complicated

People ask, "Where do we start?

How do we make the bishops accountable?

How do we dismantle this systemic and shameful infrastructure that has been permitted to grow like a cancer within our church?"

Most of the answers are complicated; this one is not. Continue reading

* The Archdiocese has pulled The Wuerl Record and carries their well-done explanation.

• Elizabeth Scalia is Editor-at-Large at Aleteia and the award-winning author of Strange Gods, Unmasking the Idols in Everyday Life and Little Sins Mean a Lot: Kicking Our Bad Habits Before They Kick You.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl celebrated Mass at Epiphany Church in Washington, a few blocks from Georgetown.

This was one day after the university hosted a lecture by Cecile Richards, the CEO of Planned Parenthood.

Ms Richards was invited to speak university by the Lecture Fund, a student organisation.

Previous lectures have been given by President Barack Obama, PayPal cofounder Peter Theil, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, and conservative commentator Ann Coulter.

Ms Richards reportedly received a standing ovation after her lecture.

Her speech focused on expanding access to abortion and artificial contraception, saying that this is necessary for the advancement of gender and racial equality.

She also referenced past civil rights struggles in her April 20 speech and also emphasised the idea that women need contraception to be successful.

At the Mass for Life, attended by about 100 students and Georgetown alumni, Cardinal Wuerl said: "Do not let anyone reduce for you the greatness of the American dream to the level of free contraceptives."

The cardinal also denounced the "political correctness movement" and the twisting of the meaning of words like "choice".

"The word ‘choice' is a smokescreen behind which those killing unborn children take refuge. Every chance you get, blow that smoke away," Cardinal Wuerl told the students.

"But the Word of God comes to us to say, ‘do not conform yourself to this age'," the cardinal added.

Priests who minister to several college campuses in Washington archdiocese concelebrated the Mass with Cardinal Wuerl.

A Georgetown statement said the university is committed to "the free exchange of ideas, even when those ideas may be difficult, controversial or objectionable to some".

The university said that it does not endorse every speaker and some speakers represent views that are contrary to its "Catholic and Jesuit identity".

Georgetown is the oldest Catholic higher education institution in the US.

Sources

• The Tablet
• Catholic News Agency
• Image: Cardinal's blog

The US bishops, meeting this week in Baltimore, approved an election guide called "Faithful Citizenship".

It stresses the moral imperative to evaluate political candidates according to their position on marriage and abortion.

It addresses a broad range of issues in Catholic social teaching, including protecting immigrants and the environment, fighting racism and poverty, and opposing the death penalty.

But the bishops said they consider opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights paramount in this US presidential election season and beyond.

Bishop Robert McElroy of San Diego said the document was "gravely hobbled" and did not reflect the Pope's priorities.

Bishop McElroy argued that the document, a re-working of an 84-page treatise first written in 2007, should be scrapped.

"Specifically, I think the Pope is telling us that alongside the issues of abortion and euthanasia — which are central aspects of our commitment to transform this world — poverty and the degradation of the Earth are also central," Bishop McElroy said.

"But this document keeps to the structure of the worldview of 2007. It does not put those there."

Bishop McElroy argued that the new draft still "provides a warrant for those who will misuse this document outside this room to exclude poverty and exclude the environment as key issues and say they are secondary, and cite this document as they have done for the last two election cycles".

Bishop McElroy was supported by a number of other bishops, some of whom were also dismayed by the number of times the draft mentioned same-sex marriage, given that the US Supreme Court has ruled on that issue.

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington said that while the document is not perfect, it is still good.

Cardinal Wuerl said that by supporting it "we will have something done this year and not run the risk of trying to do something in the midst of an election campaign".

The document was approved by 210-21 with five abstentions.

Sources

• Associated Press
• Religion News Service
• Image: National Catholic Reporter

Cardinal Wilfred Napier of Durban told Crux that he shares concerns about "the choice of the people that are writing up the final document" for the synod.

Pope Francis appointed a 10-member commission to put together the final synod document, which will be submitted to the Pontiff.

"If we're going to get a fair expression of what the synod is about, [such as] what the Church in Africa really would like to see happening," Cardinal Napier said, then different people should be chosen.

"We wouldn't like to see the same kind of people on that committee who were there the last time, who caused us the grief that we had."

Cardinal Napier was referring to a controversial interim report in 2014 that seemed to embrace a progressive line on some debated questions.

One reported version of the letter, allegedly signed by 13 cardinals and given to the Pontiff on the first day of the synod, was sharply critical.

It stated the synod process "seems designed to facilitate predetermined results on important disputed questions".

Four of the alleged signatories subsequently said they had never signed the document or supported its arguments.

After he received the letter, Pope Francis reportedly told synod participants not to give into a "hermeneutic of conspiracy" that is "sociologically weak and spiritually unhelpful".

Cardinal Napier acknowledged signing a letter, but said its content was different from that presented in early news reports.

The letter he signed, he told Crux, was specifically about the 10-member commission preparing the final document.

US Cardinal Donald Wuerl, who is a member of the final document drafting commission, defended its make-up.

"It looks to me like it reflects the makeup of the synod," he said.

There have been reports that the initiative to send a letter to Pope Francis complaining about the synod process came from Cardinal George Pell.

New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan, one of the alleged signatories, said a letter highlighting several perceived problems with the synod process was sent to Pope Francis before the synod began.

Sources

• Crux
• Associated Press
• Reuters
• National Catholic Reporter
• Catholic World News
• Image: Irish Times

Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington said that this is in recognition of the US's large Hispanic population and the fact that Serra spoke Spanish.

Spanish is also the Pope's native tongue and Francis is the first pontiff from the New World, where Spanish is the main language, Cardinal Wuerl said.

The Washington Mass will be celebrated at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception and the adjoining campus of the Catholic University of America.

A Jumbotron translation to English will be at the venue.

Continue reading